Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Centurion_1711

British Battlecruisers

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[COMFY]
Players
538 posts
6,017 battles

Hi all,

I know we haven't even got the British Battleship tree yet, but I was thinking about some of the Battlecruisers that Britain designed. I'm not sure on their tiers, so i'll just list a few that could be part of a split line.

 

Invincible class:

Spoiler

300px-HMS_Invincible_(1907)_British_Battleship.jpg.8b39450c7b36805a4202c6f2c5307bd4.jpg

Armament:

  • 8x 12" guns in four twin mounts. (turret fore, turret aft, and a turret amidships on either side if the superstructure)
  • 16x 4" guns
  • LMG's for AA
  • 5x 18" torpedo tubes (submerged, though)

Speed: 25 knots, 41,000 shp

Displacement: up to 20,420 tons

Armour: 

  • 6" (152mm) belt
  • 7" (180mm) turret
  • 7" barbettes

This could make a neat low-tier ship, with greater manoeuvrability than the BB of the same tier. AA is poor, but that is normal for WWI-era ships. 

Lion class:

Spoiler

LionSP_001672.jpg.c284968d65b1bbe1d48bfefca53d1e6f.jpg

Armament: 

  • 8x 13.5" guns in four dual mounts (two fore, one aft, one amidships)
  • 16x 4" guns
  • Two submerged 21" torpedo tubes (one per side)
  • various AA guns at various times (2x 40mm pom-poms, 76mm HA gun etc.)

Speed: 27.5 knots (HMS Princess Royal did reach 28.5 knots on trials), 70,000 shp

Displacement: up to 30,820 tons

Armour:

  • up to 9" belt (229mm)
  • 9" turrets
  • 9" barbettes

A little faster, better armoured and better armed than the Invincible class, good for the tier afterwards I think.

Courageous class:

Spoiler

220px-HMS_Furious-1.jpg.eb2edc94ee360a3ee10aa1254c497fa7.jpg

Armament:

  • 4x 15" guns in two twin turrets (one fore, one aft)
  • As you can see in the photo, HMS Furious was meant to be refitted with a with 2x 18" guns in single mounts (but only one turret was fitted)
  • 18x 4" guns
  • 2x 3" AA guns

Speed: 32 knots, 90,000 shp

Displacement: up to 22,560 tons

Armour:

  • 3" (76mm) belt
  • 9" (229mm) turrets
  • 7" (180mm) barbettes

A bit of an oddity. This ship is closer to a cruiser than a battleship, but surely has to be in the BC line due to its 18" guns. Perhaps they could be an upgrade (may get quite derpy though). I think it could be balanced: fast, little armour protection, and the largest guns of its tier.

Renown class:

Spoiler

Renown-9.jpg.6825a3b75e98c457ac6f0580a24afe7c.jpg

(Stats for HMS Renown after her WWII refit)

Armament: 

  • 6x 15" guns in three dual mounts (two fore, one aft)
  • 20x 4.5" DP guns in ten dual mounts
  • 3x octuple 40mm pom-poms
  • 16x .50cal Vickers machine guns, in four quad mounts

Speed: 31.5 knots, 112,000 shp

Displacement: up to 36,800 tons

Armour:

  • 9" belt
  • 9" turrets
  • 7" barbettes

Normal service is resumed with this class. Strong armour, large size and high speed make this a good alternative to a ships like the Queen Elizabeth class. With a refitted hull, these Battlecruisers have a scary secondary battery and formidable AA too. I think this would be an enjoyable ship to play, and is in my opinion one of the better looking ships of WWII.

G3 class:

Spoiler

598dd9f7f11f9_G3classBC.png.78360afee3ca35db359a293d1e0bc5b6.png

Armament:

  • 9x 16" guns in three triple mounts
  • 16x 6" guns in twin mounts
  • 6x 4.7" AA guns
  • 4x 10 barrel 40mm pom-poms

Speed: 32 knots, 160,000 shp

Displacement: 53,909 tons max

Armour:

  • 14" (356mm) belt
  • 17" (432mm) turrets
  • 14" barbettes

A design that led to the Nelson class. This would have to be at a higher tier, due to a good speed, stronger armour and competitive armament. Also has the unusual turret layout of the Nelsons and Izumo. One was actually (thought to be) laid down, but all were cancelled after the Washington Naval Treaty.

Thanks for reading, I hope the post wasn't too long (definitely felt that way :Smile_teethhappy:) Feel free to list any other ships that I may have missed, or could work in this line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
5,609 posts
5,569 battles

Corageous would be really bad idea in a BB slot.

Renown... idk, i really hate that 6 gunners in WoWs. Gneisenau works because everything except guns is at least good, but Renown with standard 381mm guns and almost Hood-like maneuverabilty would be really weak.

G3. No. Please just no, that huge a s s ship with bad armor would be terrible. And the turret layout is gamewise the worst torture machine i can even think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DREAD]
Players
9,716 posts
6,864 battles

T5 would rather be TIGER instead of Courageous/Furios. Furious is too much of an oddity to work, Courageous COULD work as a T4/5 Prem but would be extremely weird.

 

T6 would be your WW2 Renown, T7 either a refitted Admiral or J3. 

 

G3 would work st T8 as a fast Nelson pretty much and T9 / 10 would need to be fantasy ships loosely based on K2/3 etc proposals. 

 

I for one would be only interested in T3-6 in this case. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
538 posts
6,017 battles
On 12/08/2017 at 1:36 PM, Salentine said:

and the lion is in the BB tree already...

 

That's the newer HMS Lion, laid down but never completed. There was an older HMS Lion, which was a battlecruiser in WWI. If you read the specs, the two ships are quite different. Britain has a habit of reusing ship names: There have been a few HMS Invincibles, about 5 or 6 Ark Royals, etc.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SLOTH]
Players
3,041 posts
5,653 battles
2 hours ago, Centurion_1711 said:

That's the newer HMS Lion, laid down but never completed. There was an older HMS Lion, which was a battlecruiser in WWI. If you read the specs, the two ships are quite different. Britain has a habit of reusing ship names: There have been a few HMS Invincibles, about 5 or 6 Ark Royals, etc.

Theres a lot of countries that do that

Germany has like 20 emdens,

America has at least 2 Iowas and Japan has like 500 Kongous

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
538 posts
6,017 battles
18 hours ago, broja_jacra said:

@Centurion_1711 love your profile pic

 

Thanks, hoping Wolves have a better season and we get promoted to the Premier League again!

On topic though, perhaps the Courageous class Battlecruisers would be better in a British heavy cruiser line (heavy in the sense the guns are large, not armour). It might be a good follow-up to the County class 8" cruisers, though it'd need a fictional hull upgrade to boost its AA rating. Either that or WG have to travel into the depths of blueprint designs to find ships for both of these lines.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester, Players, Sailing Hamster
1,920 posts
3,901 battles
2 hours ago, Centurion_1711 said:

Thanks, hoping Wolves have a better season and we get promoted to the Premier League again!

On topic though, perhaps the Courageous class Battlecruisers would be better in a British heavy cruiser line (heavy in the sense the guns are large, not armour). It might be a good follow-up to the County class 8" cruisers, though it'd need a fictional hull upgrade to boost its AA rating. Either that or WG have to travel into the depths of blueprint designs to find ships for both of these lines.

 

To be honest, the Courageous class doesn't fit anywhere at all. Not in a BC line or a CA line. The size of a BC, combined with a 76mm belt, skipping along at 32kn, with 4 15" guns. I place them as a tier 4 premium, on account of being so damn unique, since they don't fit anywhere.

 

It does work with the old model for premium ships, which are too unique to be in a line, some of the older premiums like Atlanta & Kitakami. Hence Courageous' home should be among them as an oddball. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,162 posts
18,725 battles

CC(using USN letters code)/BC lines... They would be limited to RN and KM, T3-6 maybe 7, as an alternative/secondary BB branch, basically because only those navies fully embraced the concept of a fast, dreadnought-like armed, armoured cruiser. Even the Kongos, in spite of being considered dreadnought-cruisers or battlecruisers for some time, weren't that much intended as heavy reconnaissance at the vanguard of the main fleet as those in the two pre-WW1 most important navies were. Some may say that Alaska (USN) or the Borodinos (RU) are battlecruisers too, but the former was clasified as "big cruiser" (CB) and intended as the core of a task group if needed, and the latter were the Russian battleships for the Black Sea Fleet.

 

HMS Courageous in that line? Hell, no: she and her sisters were supposed to be used mainly in surprise attacks against coastal positions (Lord Fisher's Baltic Project first, raid proposals against Heligoland and Zeebrugge/Ostend later), being able to shell even forts while dodging the counterfire. That's why, lacking adaptability to other roles, they were converted later into CVs. As a premium ship maybe, in a fashion like that of Graf Spee, although a very odd one.

 

Mi personal proposal for both lines (tier - RN - KM):

 

T3 - Invincible - Von der Tann

T4 - Due to being Lion already taken as a name, Queen Mary or Princess Royal - Goeben

T5 - Tiger - Seydlitz

T6 - Renown - Derfflinger

T7 - Admiral Class (only Hood completed) - Mackensen Class (laid down but never completed)

 

T8 onwards is entering the realms of blueprints and fantasy, so I'll stop there.

 

Salute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SLOTH]
Players
3,041 posts
5,653 battles
13 minutes ago, Estaca_de_Bares said:

CC(using USN letters code)/BC lines... They would be limited to RN and KM, T3-6 maybe 7, as an alternative/secondary BB branch, basically because only those navies fully embraced the concept of a fast, dreadnought-like armed, armoured cruiser. Even the Kongos, in spite of being considered dreadnought-cruisers or battlecruisers for some time, weren't that much intended as heavy reconnaissance at the vanguard of the main fleet as those in the two pre-WW1 most important navies were. Some may say that Alaska (USN) or the Borodinos (RU) are battlecruisers too, but the former was clasified as "big cruiser" (CB) and intended as the core of a task group if needed, and the latter were the Russian battleships for the Black Sea Fleet.

 

HMS Courageous in that line? Hell, no: she and her sisters were supposed to be used mainly in surprise attacks against coastal positions (Lord Fisher's Baltic Project first, raid proposals against Heligoland and Zeebrugge/Ostend later), being able to shell even forts while dodging the counterfire. That's why, lacking adaptability to other roles, they were converted later into CVs. As a premium ship maybe, in a fashion like that of Graf Spee, although a very odd one.

 

Mi personal proposal for both lines (tier - RN - KM):

 

T3 - Invincible - Von der Tann

T4 - Due to being Lion already taken as a name, Queen Mary or Princess Royal - Goeben

T5 - Tiger - Seydlitz

T6 - Renown - Derfflinger

T7 - Admiral Class (only Hood completed) - Mackensen Class (laid down but never completed)

 

T8 onwards is entering the realms of blueprints and fantasy, so I'll stop there.

 

Salute.

"Admiral" should not be in the game.

Hood or bust, and since Hood is already in game, its looking more like bust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester, Players, Sailing Hamster
1,920 posts
3,901 battles
On 15/08/2017 at 1:53 PM, Estaca_de_Bares said:

CC(using USN letters code)/BC lines... They would be limited to RN and KM, T3-6 maybe 7, as an alternative/secondary BB branch, basically because only those navies fully embraced the concept of a fast, dreadnought-like armed, armoured cruiser. Even the Kongos, in spite of being considered dreadnought-cruisers or battlecruisers for some time, weren't that much intended as heavy reconnaissance at the vanguard of the main fleet as those in the two pre-WW1 most important navies were. Some may say that Alaska (USN) or the Borodinos (RU) are battlecruisers too, but the former was clasified as "big cruiser" (CB) and intended as the core of a task group if needed, and the latter were the Russian battleships for the Black Sea Fleet.

 

HMS Courageous in that line? Hell, no: she and her sisters were supposed to be used mainly in surprise attacks against coastal positions (Lord Fisher's Baltic Project first, raid proposals against Heligoland and Zeebrugge/Ostend later), being able to shell even forts while dodging the counterfire. That's why, lacking adaptability to other roles, they were converted later into CVs. As a premium ship maybe, in a fashion like that of Graf Spee, although a very odd one.

 

Mi personal proposal for both lines (tier - RN - KM):

 

T3 - Invincible - Von der Tann

T4 - Due to being Lion already taken as a name, Queen Mary or Princess Royal - Goeben

T5 - Tiger - Seydlitz

T6 - Renown - Derfflinger

T7 - Admiral Class (only Hood completed) - Mackensen Class (laid down but never completed)

 

T8 onwards is entering the realms of blueprints and fantasy, so I'll stop there.

 

Salute.

 

You put Seydlitz, Derfflinger & Mackensen too high really.

Admiral is not present because Hood is the Admiral. The only way WG can remain partially consistent with an Admiral is to have the heavily rebuilt version only (No stock hulls), and even then, that is Hood's refit.

The tier 9 Lion should just be renamed to Temeraire. Makes it a lot simpler.

 

WRMLJJL.png

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,162 posts
18,725 battles
2 hours ago, Trainspite said:

 

You put Seydlitz, Derfflinger & Mackensen too high really.

Admiral is not present because Hood is the Admiral. The only way WG can remain partially consistent with an Admiral is to have the heavily rebuilt version only (No stock hulls), and even then, that is Hood's refit.

The tier 9 Lion should just be renamed to Temeraire. Makes it a lot simpler.

 

WRMLJJL.png

You're probably right about me putting those three too high, being the table you posted a better way of doing things. It also opens the option for WG to sell Goeben to the Turkish community as a premium (Yavuz). What I don't really fancy is extending the lines up to T10: something like IJN gunboats or the secondary Russian DD line feels better IMHO.

 

Salute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ST-EU]
Supertester, Players, Sailing Hamster
1,920 posts
3,901 battles
Just now, Estaca_de_Bares said:

You're probably right about me putting those three too high, being the table you posted a better way of doing things. It also opens the option for WG to sell Goeben to the Turkish community as a premium (Yavuz). What I don't really fancy is extending the lines up to T10: something like IJN gunboats or the secondary Russian DD line feels better IMHO.

 

Salute.

 

Well, I have only included ships with a design schematic in there, hence the USN only has a partial tree. though there are a few problems, like B-59 could be OP for tier 6, SGK5041 is quite similar to 4542 and could be UP at tier 10. 

 

I guess not having a tier 10 in the line makes it quite unattractive to go down in comparison to other lines. The second IJN DD line was said to be getting a tier 9 and 10 at some point, though maybe Akizuki is being moved up to tier 9 and V7 Akizuki Kai is at tier 10. I would agree that a ship line should have mostly real ships, and if a secondary line is completely paper, then it shouldn't be there. So that USN BC line is unlikely, but the IJN, KM and RN ones would probably make it to tier 10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BRVHT]
Players
261 posts
5,307 battles
On 15/08/2017 at 10:48 AM, Centurion_1711 said:

Thanks, hoping Wolves have a better season and we get promoted to the Premier League again!

On topic though, perhaps the Courageous class Battlecruisers would be better in a British heavy cruiser line (heavy in the sense the guns are large, not armour). It might be a good follow-up to the County class 8" cruisers, though it'd need a fictional hull upgrade to boost its AA rating. Either that or WG have to travel into the depths of blueprint designs to find ships for both of these lines.

well hopefully. a half decent start to the season and at the right end of the table so fingers crossed

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
274 posts
9,308 battles
On 8/29/2017 at 11:11 PM, Combat_Hamster said:

3-Invincible/Von Der Tann,   4-Lion/Goeben (Yavuz  would be cool ),  5-  Tiger/Repulse/Iron Dog, 6-WW2 Renown

My British BC line is : 3 Indefatigable, 4 Queen Mary, 5 Tiger, 6 Renown, 7 Admiral, 8 J3, 9 G3 and 10 K3

For Germans I think id do, 3 Von Der Tann, 4 Seydlitz, 5 Mackensen, 6 O class, 7 Ersatz Yorck then not sure for 8, 9 and 10 

Premiums:

British: 3 Invincible, 5 Repulse 

German: 4 Lutzow

Then Yavuz at 4 in ottoman service but she can train German commanders as her crew remained German during WW1

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×